...Broadway Shows...

The other night Alison and I saw Wicked in Boston, it was the 3rd time I have seen Wicked, and it was the 3rd time I saw it in Boston. I think I don't mind seeing it again and again because each time I do a new song strikes me as a real moment in the show - and that could be driven primarily by the characters and the way the actors and actresses sing each song. Not sure exactly, but the first time I saw it, it was obviously 'Defying Gravity' that stood out - given it probably is one of the most powerful songs from the last 10 years of Broadway, but I'll get to that later.

This time around it was 'As Long As You're Mine', no idea why. I listen to it now and I am not particularly moved by it, but I think it was just a moment where there wasn't a lot of action on the stage, and being in the 2nd row it was exciting to see 2 people act on stage, close up. It is a good song, but I can 100% guarantee that it won't be my favorite song.

This is not the point of why I am writing this. I am writing this because it struck me on my ride home from work tonight that out of all of the males in the universe that I am either friends with, or even know on any level, I can't think of anyone who knows, or cares more, about Broadway than me. That isn't a statement about how much I know in regards to Broadway, I know a minuscule amount - and I do care about the shows and the actors, and plays, etc...but not as much as someone who really cares - like Alison, for example.

Here is, in chronological order, the 10 most important events for me in regards to seeing Broadway style shows:

1. Early 80's - My mom was in a show - Sweet Charity, maybe, which was performed by the local theater group my family was a part of. And I remember specifically being very confused by her makeup, the new person she had become, and I remember not liking it. It wasn't her, it was her character, but it wasn't my Mom, and it struck me as odd. I was intrigued by this whole process as she continued to be in other plays, including Hannah & Her Sisters, which I was older for and understood she was acting, but still didn't like that she had to cry and be upset in the play. This whole process - me understanding what acting was, and watching people be a part of it, honestly scared me a little bit. I can't explain it, but I was intrigued, from afar.

2. Mid 80's - Seeing Annie somewhere in Boston with my parents. I don't remember a single thing about the show itself, or even really caring about the show after it was over. But what I do remember is that everything felt so big, so exciting and so energetic. People had tickets and entered a theater like a movie theatre, but they were buzzing - it wasn't like a movie, people were dressed nicer and the stairs were steeper and it was just large. I remember being impressed, which was a better feeling than being intimidated, like I explained above.

3. 1991 - I saw Cats in London with my parents, and without question it was literally one of the most depressing and disappointing things I have ever seen. Cats was all the rage, and I was definitely supposed to love this show, and I think it was literally impossible to love this show. I remember thinking, "This is Broadway, and people love Broadway, this is awful, how can this all make sense?" Now I am older, I still am baffled by the fact that Cats was a big deal, it was fairly horrible from what I can tell.

4. 1994 - I saw Tommy in Boston with Mike Baird, Rebecca Alukonis and Melissa St. Croix, and it was completely moving. There are a few things that stand out from this. First, I missed Drew Bledsoe's 45 completions in 70 attempts performance v. the Vikings during this show, but I recall weighing that against the show and recognizing that it wasn't a big deal to me. I was not upset.

I also remember from the opening with "Sparks", the whole show was LOUD! It was energetic, it was phenomenal. This was also my first major exposure to The Who, so I don't know which was more important, but I left this thinking, "I could see more of this kind of thing". I didn't, for a long, long time, actually - but at the same time, the experience of being at a musical and being invested was thrilling to me.

5. 1997 - Riverdance came to Boston and while this isn't a Broadway show, necessarily, at the time with the limited exposure I had to the theater, this counted. It was important to me because I felt like I was regressing towards my mean - I was seeing enough on the positive and negative side of things, and I was starting to formulate an opinion. I think that Riverdance was critical to not only my theater appreciation, but also in my honing of my bull&hit gauge. And this show was 100% BS. Flatley later admitted he pumped in sound, b/c, after all, how could the actors make all that noise organically, he asked? Good question - that's why we were all intrigued, Oz... I feel venom towards this guy, and I had no desire to go to a show for a long time after this.

6. 2004 - My theater life changed significantly when I met Alison and was able to have access to shows, geographically, b/c Alison's parents lived so close to the city. I hadn't yet seen a show on Broadway, and the notion was exciting to me, even though the idea of seeing a show wasn't that exciting for the show's sake. I had listened to the Tommy soundtrack until the disc was cracked, literally. But beyond that, I wasn't driven to go anywhere to see a show.

In 2004 Alison took me to see Avenue Q on Broadway, and it worked. I was hooked. Pretty much instantly. The quality of a Broadway show, from the performers to the sets, to the theaters, all of it hooked me. But seeing Avenue Q is one thing, that's easy, its funny and light, but what about some real, hard-hitting Broadway. Would that work on me? Yes, it would.

7. 2007 - I was lucky enough to see a first run of Mary Poppins on Broadway, whose stage, set, scenery, singing and spectacle officially turned me into someone who 100% loved Broadway. I love it. I love the music and the way the songs drag you from one segment to the other. I love how you never know what the next scene will "sound" like - you don't get that out of movies. Unless you're talking about revolutionary and groundbreaking film making, you have to live through the feeling, no matter what.

Don't get me wrong, I love movies, obviously, but Mary Poppins was the first time I can remember being in a theater, and aside from Tommy's audio power, I felt in awe. I felt small, and I felt like I was watching something real happen in front of me - a coordination of a great deal of time & effort, and I appreciated it.

8. 2008 - Like any other person who had a friend or a relative, I had heard of Rent by 2008. The movie came out in 2006, and I knew a vague idea of the plot - these lazy screwball drugbags had AIDS and blamed the world for it - that's what I thought at least, and I'm not sure I'm too wrong about it now.

More literally, in the summer of '06 I was staying at a boutique hotel literally right next door to Rent, and at about 10.15 or so, I noticed that if I listened I could hear the sound of the show next door - the cheering, clapping and shouting. It pains me to know I had a free night in NYC and I was feet, within earshot, of the show and didn't see it. We all have regrets.

But I had steered clear of it - it was an intimidating thing at this point - a show everyone knew and loved, and if I really wanted to be embrace the Broadway community, I felt a great sense of pressure to know and love this show as well. In 2008 when the show closed, a decision was made to show the last performance in movie theaters, with some editing. I decided this was the right time to see it - on my home turf a movie theater a few miles down the road.

Up to this point, I think it's safe to say I hadn't been as moved by a collection of music for a relatively short span of time, with the only exceptions being Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, STP's Purple and Radiohead's OK Computer. The performance didn't have the original cast, and it just was on the screen, but I absolutely felt like I was there, and while I don't feel as strongly about it now as I did then, I could see how this really gripped an entire generation and moved people to love Rent. These songs are completely etched into my head at this point, and I know I'll listen to them for the rest of my life.

Since this film, I saw Rent live on stage in Boston and I saw a local production in Newton as well - I'm very much looking forward to seeing it in a rebirth in 20 or 30 years as well.

9. 2009 - If Rent gave license to the world to write a Broadway production that not only aimed for youth, but also for non-white youth, and aimed for an audience it wasn't going to attract in mid-town Manhattan on an 8x a week basis, In The Heights was a show that took firm grasp of that invitation and RSVP'd with force.

There are 4 to 6 songs in this that I consider masterpieces - perfect songs, but also amazing elements to a very rich story of friendship and meaning and place in time, importance in history. Thinking locally and effecting the people closest to you - these kinds of values are so magnificent and no show I have ever seen took such a stranglehold of your emotions like In The Heights has done for me. I saw it on Broadway with a good portion of the Original Cast, including the lead, who is the lifeblood of the show.

The finale song, actually the final 3, as well as the 2 songs leading to Intermission are powerful, emotional songs that tell such a complete story - totally remarkable. In the Heights is my favorite show I've ever seen - it'll be a movie someday and I hope people see it, but it's the kind of show that literally makes you want to be a better person and care more, with completely beautiful music.

10. 2010 - "You get everyone addicted to your coffee, and off you go," is a line from In The Heights - during one of the emotional finale songs, and it sort of sums up how I feel about Broadway and musicals at this point. I am not shutting the door on possibilities of good songs, and powerful stories. Next To Normal was a tremendous show, but it had a soft 2nd act, and I am sure I'll love Fela and Memphis when I see them, and that kind of looking forward is great, but I also look back.

Wicked opened the same year as Avenue Q, and while I don't regret seeing Avenue Q within it's first 12 months, I am pained by the fact that Kristen Chenoweth and Idina Menzel were on stage for Wicked, and I didn't even come close to seeing it. It wasn't even on my radar. I don't have regret like this with anything else in my life. I cared about sports so early that I didn't miss anything I could logically see - but the powerhouse performances by IM and KC are something I can only see glimpses of on Youtube (which I can't stand) and in documentaries.

Seeing Wicked now is like watching the NFL with the replacement players - the real power and emotion and music comes from the original cast. That being said, I saw the performance the other night and it made me hopeful that not only is the musical alive and well, but it can work in Boston, and if the songs are right, it can work anywhere.

I am of the opinion that the performers in Manhattan's musical are the most talented people in the world in terms of music. I wish those people were the heroes in terms of talent. I can't stress enough - you need to find a way, the dime, the time, everything, to see a show you think you'll like in New York.

They put it all on the line 8 times a week and go out there, live, and sing to the best of their abilities which are great.

I don't know what it is about me, as a 33 year old Male, that makes me so interested and passionate about Broadway and what it has to offer, but I wouldn't trade it for anything in the world. I guess I sacrifice things, but I am not sure what? There is always room for entertainment in my life, and I am glad Broadway is taking up a large %.

...Mr. Parks...

I don't know Mr. Parks at all, but this is a great remembrance about him in today's Boston Globe. I don't even know if I know anyone who knows him, I may, he was at UMass while I was there.

It's funny because something like this shouldn't strike me emotionally, but reading what she had to say about her band leader I was immediately drawn to my UMass organized sport memories, which always come in the form of my playing days on Zoodisc.

Long passed are the days where I try to justify what UMass Ultimate meant to me, from an athletic or commitment standpoint. I am very much over trying to convince people we took this thing seriously, and we cared, and we were emotional about it.

I had fun with a few teammates this week remembering a brotherly-love type argument I got into with a teammate, and it was hilarious to look back, and it was so heated and passionate at the time, we cared a hell of a lot about that team.

But the point of this post was to recognize a UMass legend - he deserves it, but also to recognize my teammates I played with at UMass, who ultimately became some of my best friends.

The real point of my post is this: I completely forget that having friends you can admire, respect, look up to and draw inspiration from is something I can never take for granted, I'm so completely humbled to be surrounded by some of the best people I could imagine, and while some people only get that type of guidance and leadership from coaches, band leaders, bosses, etc, I get it whenever I need it from my friends - Minutemen, or Lakers alike...

...Coach K v. Wojo. Wojo loses...

I have copied an entire article written by Adrian Wojnarowski about Coach K and his comments about the Russia/USA game in 1972. I generally really like Adrian's articles, but I think this one is unmitigated crap.

I love Coach K so much right now, for 3 reasons: (1) He is doing an amazing job with this team USA, and he did an amazing job last time. I find him fascinating and brilliant as a coach. (2) Coach K has been so loyal to Duke, which isn't a pre-requisite for my respect, but it is something I can respect, therefore, he wins. (3) He's fair, and respectful, and everyone knows that about him.

I didn't grow up liking Coach K, I actually think I disliked Duke, so my defense of Coach K really comes from a place of earned respect, and in home-town loving sports world, I honestly think that liking someone from outside your state, your home town, removed from your favorite team, then you are an anomaly, and your opinion should carry weight. Therefore, I'm going to argue with everything Wojo says in the article below. His text is in bold, my comments are italicized.

ISTANBUL – In the end, it was the kind of desperate stunt that comes from a coach holding too little faith in his team, perhaps too little preparation. Behind the cover of some kind of nationalistic stand, Mike Krzyzewski used the platform of the world championships to impugn the integrity of a good coach’s name. In his haste to exploit that old American basketball gash, Krzyzewski created a fresh boogeyman for a post-Cold War game between the United States and Russia. David Blatt, American traitor.

I firmly believe this is 100% bullcrap. If Coach K was Ochocinco or T.O. or Ozzie Guillen, I'd maybe believe it, but this attack of Coach K in the first paragraph goes so harshly against what we really know of him - I automatically start reading this thinking Wojo has an agenda, and that agenda is likely that he is upset that since the free-agent orgy this summer, Wojo is getting ignored. Welcome to working for Yahoo! Wojo, you aren't top priority in the readers minds...

That’s the implication for an American-Israeli coaching the old evil empire’s national team, and that’s a load of garbage. No one takes these national coaching jobs for simply national pride, but also the perks of privilege, access and residual gains. Team USA plays as much for Nike and David Stern’s imperialistic designs as it does the red, white and blue.

I don't even know what he is talking about here - I don't think I fully understand if he his accusing Coach K of wanting residuals, or Blatt. I cannot figure it out. Coach K had the Lakers job in his hands, he had the Clippers job in his hands, he has had opportunity to have it all. Everything. He consistently has reminded the world that his players are everything, that he fills a role, he has placed ego so low on his priority list - I don't even know where Wojo is coming from here.

Krzyzewski knows that truth, and he went to such a low-brow, low-rent place on the eve of Team USA’s 89-79 victory over Russia that moved the Americans into Saturday’s semifinal against Lithuania.

What Coach K said isn't even that harsh at all - he responded to a question and he accused the "American-Israeli" coach of being Russian. He's lived there for 30 years, and he coaches the Russian team. Coach K knows where Blatt grew up, he is simply referring to the fact that Blatt wants Russia to win, and to act as if the USA/USSR 1972 game is something thats emotionally difficult to deal with - which Blatt did - does require a response of "bullshit", which is what Coach K did.

“We’re friends,” Krzyzewski would say of Blatt as he brusquely marched past a reporter in the hallway outside his news conference. He didn’t want to hear the rest of a question on the subject and kept moving. Krzyzewski stopped for a second, turned around and passed on answering whether he had any regrets or had simply expressed his true belief that a differing perspective on the ’72 Olympic gold-medal game constituted some kind of patriotic treachery.

You gotta love this one. You really do. Wojo admits that Coach K didn't hear the full question, but accuses him of brushing off a "differing perspective." That's like accusing Einstein of being obstinate b/c he didn't disseminate E=MC(squared) via Twitter. You're reaching here, Wojo.

To get past the dogged, undermanned Russians, Krzyzewski riled up that old Russian hate for his players and the public. It sniffed of desperation, but Duke’s coach isn’t taking the chance of becoming the first national coach in history to fail in winning consecutive world championships. Never mind the myth of sportsmanship in international basketball, Krzyzewski used up and spit out a most disposable Blatt.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. First of all, the Russians are in the Quarterfinals of a World Basketball Championship. Nobody, including Coach K, sees them as "dogged" or "undermanned." Coach K says only respectful things of Davidson College in a early November game at Cameron Indoor. He isn't desperate, he isn't positioning Russia, he simply said 1 line, which was about a moment that was painful to an entire sports nation.

"Sportsmanship in international basketball" is exactly what is at the heart of the criminally horrible call, reaction, and celebration by the '72 Russian team. It was a different time - the 1980 US Hockey game was important b/c it was US v. USSR - for a military man like Coach K, those types of things do actually cut deep. Wojo's involvement in the Cold War is probably relegated to reruns of 'Red Dawn'.

Krzyzewski played the patriotism card to his advantage with Team USA, and yet later didn’t want the accountability of its ownership.

Yah, that...or he didn't want to deal with assholes like you, Wojo.

“Hey, I said what I thought, and after that I didn’t get a whole lot of chance to say something,” Blatt said. “I don’t know how much gamesmanship I practiced. But it looks like the [USA] coach jumped on it and used it pretty good. His guys were awfully motivated and so was he.”

Sure, Krzyzewski has a soft spot for the ’72 team, and that’s understandable. His assistant coach, Chris Collins, is the son of Doug Collins. Mike Bantom travels with Team USA in his duties with the NBA league office. I happen to disagree with Blatt, and believe an unjust chain of events occurred that cost the U.S. the gold medal. Still, the U.S. coach, Henry Iba, was too far past his prime, and his antiquated, sluggish style never properly used the athleticism and talent of those Americans. They never should’ve been in a 51-50 death grip with the Russians, but that’s how it went with an icon propped up on the sidelines.

I could write forever about this - on one hand Wojo accuses Coach K of not needing to give his players motivation, b/c they are better than Russia. Then in the next paragraph he trashes the 1972 Coach b/c the game was close - and that the "undermanned" and perhaps even "dogged" Russian team made it a game.

I also find it funny because he actually gives Coach K his due - he explains that it may actually be a wound, which could leave to a relatively benign comment like the one Coach K made. I am totally confused as to why he is so uspet with him!

They weren’t the first Olympians to get robbed and they wouldn’t be the last. Eventually, reason should’ve taken over and they should’ve gone back and accepted those silver medals. This 38-year blood war with that loss has gone on long enough, and the Americans would’ve set a terrific example had they done what they would’ve told their kids to do: Be gracious, accept the medal and move on.

Thank god we've identified the person who is able to tell us when people should get over things or not. He should thumb through his handbook and realize that the level of anger Coach K had in his comment warranted, perhaps, a tweet by Wojo, but not an entire article. He is overreacting, and now I am too. Do you see what you started here?

Yes, the ’72 saga strikes a human chord within the American basketball establishment. In an Olympics where Israeli athletes were murdered, the loss of a basketball tournament remains an ache for the ages. Before the quarterfinals game on Thursday, an inquisitive Chauncey Billups(notes) carried his breakfast over to Bantom and probed him on his memories of that fateful day in Munich.

So is it okay for Coach K to be mad, or not? I don't get it?

Before they left the dining room, Billups told Bantom that nothing Team USA would do on Thursday would make that game right for him again, and yet maybe they could let him leave the arena with something of a smile.

Bantom didn’t need a victory over the Russians – not as badly as Krzyzewski did on Thursday. He would get it, but not before sacrificing the good name of Blatt. When it was over, Krzyzewski gushed about Blatt’s genius, but that was easy at the game’s end. He had tagged him as a non-American for coaching those Russians, and labels are hard to shake when they come out of the mouth of a Hall of Fame coach. Yes, we’re friends, Coach K said. Friends, indeed. What a desperate, low-rent stunt.

Wojo accused Coach K of not wanting the "accountability of the ownership" of the comment. Seems, to me, he took ownership, and nobody brought more visibility to this comment, and blew it out of proportion as much as Wojo did.

The low-rent stunt here is the slandering of Coach K, who has spent decades working hard, ignoring the notion of legacy, and instead creating one as perhaps the last real sports figure you can admire with no hesitancy.

...Prognosticating...

At least we all know that Punxatawney Phil is a joke. I mean, we approach the whole process knowing that its just a funny, silly thing that we do to pass the time, a social norm that has grown to entertain and amuse us. That's nice.

Slightly down the ladder in terms of respectable prediction are weatherpeople in general. The countless examples of being flat out wrong far outnumber any examples of useful prediction. Basically their roles in our lives is a function of advertising space on Local News channels - they are not needed, and they essentially should exist to only let us know if there is a hurricane, tornado, or other natural disaster, weather-related, they can warn us of. Anything outside of that is frivolous, but we've accepted them.

And at the bottom of the prediction food chain are sports analysts. These are the worst because their accountability isn't low, it's next to nothing. Who is keeping track of what they say? Besides Justin, Trav & Myself, nobody really ever pays attention to how wrong these guys are basically all the time, yet they continue to predict, and we continue to be entertained by it.

But why are we entertained by it? What does it bring us to hear two "experts" tell me, before the season has even started, that the Packers and Ravens are going to meet in the Super Bowl. Guess what, they aren't. Nobody knows who is going to be in the Super Bowl - in fact, the biggest NFL experts in the Universe only serve to bring their credibility down by selecting a Super Bowl matchup.

This past weekend, Lindsey Davenport was doing analysis for the US Open and when asked who would win between Wozniacki and Sharapova, she shook her head and in true Davenport fashion just said, "I don't do that." That is the most refreshing analysis I think I have ever heard.

"I don't do that," would serve everyone well. Each Sunday for a 1/2 hour before gametime we listen to a collection of unaccountable blowhards (i hate that word, but thats what they are) sit on the sets of ESPN, CBS, NBC, FOX, etc and tell us who will win each game and why. We see their records, usually around or sub .500, and I am sure statistical analysis will show that they are literally worthless. They are a worthless experiment.

I have grown so uncomfortable with the, "so what do you think is going to happen?" question, or the "who is going to win?" question. I don't know. Nobody knows. Everyone. Nobody knows. Lets talk about something else. I am going to start taking the Davenport Approach, as I am coining it...."I don't do that," will be a common phrase you'll hear from me.

Except when it comes to ultimate. I'll take Red Tide over Zebra Muscles any day of the week.

...Variety...

I too often blog about the NBA. Not that there are rules, but if I want to get the attention of even 30% of my friends, I should talk about other things. I used to talk about politics more, but honestly the social media policy at work is scaring me off of that, as strange as that may sound. Even writing that sentence scares me a little. But I do love me some Big Brother, I really do.

So I figured I'd sorta just rant, Dennis Miller style, about all the different things that have interested me over the past few weeks. I know this is lame, and not articulate, but I'm feeling the urge to just put things down.

Straws

I am not a "They don't make 'em like they used to" kind of guy. I like change, progress, evolution, I like when things go in a different direction. One thing I don't like, however, are straws nowadays. I don't know what it is, if its the material of the paper sheath, or the material of the straw, but straws are harder to open, and they bend/break more easily than they used to.

I interact with straws a few times a week for iced coffee, so this may be a Dunkin Donuts issue, and I cringe that it most likely was a cost-saving measure, dropping the price of straws from .008 cents to .005 cents per straw worldwide, and it results in my crimping 40% of the straws I open and making it so I get equal parts Air and French Vanilla on every sip. This aggression on behalf of Dunkies won't stand.

Actually, it will stand quite easily, I have no leverage.

Nyjer Morgan

This is about baseball, and I'll keep it short, but this guy is bonkers! I don't have an opinion of him personally beyond that, but this guy is going to be my poster child for why throwing at batters is the single biggest nonsense thing in sports. It has no lasting benefit, it doesn't serve any purpose besides perpetuating some kind of false aggression, and it has no place in civilized sports - its like brawling in hockey but with less logic.

Morgan is completely nuts, but the reality is that the pitcher has said he threw at him partially b/c he didn't like that Morgan stole with a lead - that kind of thing drives me crazy. There isn't nearly as much of that in the NBA or NFL as there is in baseball - I swear to gosh so much crap comes out of baseball b/c these guys are playing a boring sport. Anyway, Morgan is crazy, baseball is silly, and fights make me queasy.

Jobs

I saw an analyst this morning on CNN that was saying she was shocked that there hasn't been an uptick in hirings in the marketplace. She said that temporary or part-time/freelance work is increasing, and she was stunned that companies weren't yet offering the full-time benefits route.

This is something that someone in the business has trouble seeing, but some of us outside of the business can see so easily. What business am I referring to? Simply put, the business of Greed.

If you are running a company, and you are driven by getting the shareholders more money, this economic downturn is the greatest thing for you. You have a 2 year built-in excuse for poor performance, which may be justified. Your company is no longer judged by the last 24 months, but by the next 24 months, which is great. As a private company, you have no incentive to increase your workforce - the reality that millions of hard working people need, and want, jobs isn't your responsibility.

Of course companies are hiring freelancers, of course they aren't paying benefits. The reality is there isn't enough work to go around for all of us to sustain our current lives - the myth of being busy at work all the time (for other people, of course) is something that we can't afford to let go of, so we act shocked when corporations can get the same output/input from an employer on 20 hours as they did on 40 hours.

The whole algorithm of what its going to take from a workforce/headcount perspective is changing.

The Mosque

I really don't have any intentions of discussing this beyond the fact that this is one of those times where people who are in charge, the leadership of this country, New York City, and even neighborhood level folks, need to stop considering the voice of every individual and what they think is right, and simply act.

My personal opinion is that Obama should step in, and become more vocal than he ever has been, about his feelings on this, and apply a pressure that has been unseen on the local level, prior to this. I would have the same opinion of G.W. Bush was in office - the person leading this country has to stand for something, and in the absence of standing for something vocally and without question, confusion reigns. Even if I don't agree with what the result is, courage in conviction and believing your own honesty is what matters. What this has all turned into is so sad, so analytically depressing, and it doesn't need to be. Someone either make this thing happen, or not happen, but lets stop dancing.

Dairy Queen

For the past 10 or 12 years or so, I decided to get Blizzards. Probably on average, 1 time per year, I'd get a Blizzard at Dairy Queen. When I was young, they were so unique - candies mixed with delicious-ish ice cream, what can beat that. Cookie Dough, Snickers, M&M's, Reeses...each flavor was so awesome. Then I had Nerds, and it was gross, but I pretended to like it.

Then I tried other flavors, I can't recall what they are, but it was always just "too much"... A blizzard is just "too much."

A few weeks ago I decided to go to my old standby - a combination at Dairy Queen I hadn't gotten since, oh I don't know, 1988? Swirl Soft Serve, cone, cherry dip.

The Blizzard has absolutely nothing on that combo. The Blizzard is auto-tune to The Cherry Dip Swirl's Joni Mitchell. So delicious. The blizzard is dead - its time for everyone else to stop pretending they like it.

Apple TV

In the spirit of fairness, I want to give Apple it's due props on how awesome Apple TV is. I never wanted Apple TV before for a few reasons. (1) It didn't stream HD, which really is a reason to not make a product, but in true Apple form, they made it anyway. (2) Apple TV didn't have a deep enough library, and without the relationship with a company like Netflix, it felt very limiting.

They fixed both those things, and for only $99 bucks we're finally seeing the future of what TV will look like in a tangible way, and that is awesome. I'd be shocked if my house didn't have an Apple TV by October 1.

Mad Men

I can't speak for every show on TV, but right now I watch about 3 shows. I watch Mad Men religiously, I watch Survivor and I watch Hard Knocks. The rest is live sports, or sports highlights programming. If Real Time With Bill Maher is on, I'm all over it.

I know this though, the last 2 weeks of Mad Men have been unbelievable. There is 1 show that comes to mind that was as good as this one late in it's 4th season, and that is The Wire. The Sopranos was good, but had tailed off, and the same goes for The West Wing.

But watching an episode of Mad Men is an education, it reminds me of my film class days, or even my English class days, where an art form was created in a way that gave you license to take leaps, create thoughts, go beyond the notion that "I just need to be entertained." Listen, I have no problem with entertainment, and I have no issue if people only want to watch Reality TV, I won't fault you for it, (unless its Jersey Shore - I fault you for that) but for me, personally, I'm at a time where I want a TV show to mean something to me, and Mad Men takes care of everything.

I'm looking for a good Mad Men email buddy - someone who will let me rant about my favorite parts, the most disappointing parts, and the parts that made me want to scream with joy and/or agony. I'll be accepting applications in the form of an essay. You wanna be my buddy, you have to explain to me why you think Peggy hasn't left Sterling-Cooper-Draper-Price yet.